5 The complaint 25/05/2012 I write: Hereby is notified that the the Swedish government systematically violates applicable The EU law, Machinery Directive, by ordering the application of law that the the legal assessment of machinery turbines to ignore The EU law, Machinery Directive. The the Swedish Supervisory Authority, Work Environment Authority, has not completed the compulsory market surveillance which is a condition for the machine wind turbine may be operational. No machine wind turbines in Sweden, before being put into operation followed the security rules specified in Machinery Directive. All machines wind turbines in operation in Sweden are now endangering the lives of the public and, where appropriate there pest. Note violates the Machinery Directive Här anges andra skrivelser till EU-kommissionen och till EU-ombudsman Skrivelse till Kommissionen skrevs efter det att EU-ombudsman avslagit min anmälan med hänvisning till bestämmelser att jag först borde ha begärt "lämpliga hänvändelser" hos Eu-kommissionen. Here are the other letters to the European Commission and EU ombudsman Letter to the Commission was written after the EU ombudsman rejected my application with reference to provisions that first I should have asked "the appropriate administrative approaches" of the EU Commission skrivelse till EU-ombudsman med anledning av att EU-kommissionen inte hade behandlat andra delen av min anmälan om talerätt. I skrivelse till Kommissionen påpekade jag grundläggande felaktigheter i skrivelse från Kommissionen som är så uppenbara att de endast kan förklaras av okunnighet i förståelsen av svenska språket. Jag erbjöd mig att översätta detta brev till engelska. 11/06/2013 letter to the EU ombudsman on the grounds that the European Commission had not dealt with the second part of my notification on standing. In the letter to the Commission 1/15/2014, I pointed out the basic errors in the letter from the Commission which are so obvious that they can only be explained by ignorance in the understanding of the Swedish language. I offered to translate this letter into English. Dagen efter beslöt EU-kommisionen att avslå min klagan enligt ovan av åsidosättande av Maskindirektivet men yttrar sig inte om anmälan av inskränkning av talerätt. The day after the EU Commission decided to reject my complaint as above 01/21/2014 for infringement of Machinery Directive but said nothing about the notification of the restriction of the locus standi 5

7 wind turbines.. EU Commission makes 01/21/2014 the only possible conclusion "that the Swedish Work Environment Authority has not done any market of wind turbines to verify their conformity with the Machinery Directive." One obvious conclusion due to lack of evidence in the form of copies of documents naturally leads to the Swedish Work Environment Authority has not done any market surveillance of wind turbines and thus has not met to apply the law Machinery Directive. EU-kommissionen borde före beslut i ärendet av svenska staten ha krävt dessa kopior och inte enbart ange vad svenska staten svarat. The European Commission should before decision in the case of the Swedish government have demanded these copies and not only enter what the Swedish government has responded. I sitt avslag styrker kommissionen ständigt sitt beslut med att hänvisa till vad svenska staten har påstått. Jag finner det nödvändigt att påpeka att mina klagomål inte rör något som svenska staten svarat utan klagomålen utgörs av två bevisbara underlåtenheter att följa gällande lag; Maskindirektiv och talerätt. Jag framför således inge invändningar mot vad svenska staten svarat EU-kommissionen utan att svenska staten inte tillåter att gällande lag tillämpas. In its rejection 21/01/2014 _the Commission continuously is proving its decision by referring to what the Swedish government has alleges. I find it necessary to point out that my complaints not related to something that the Swedish government responded but my complaint consists of two provable omissions to comply with applicable law; Machinery Directive and standing. I submit, therefore, no objection to what the Swedish government responded The European Commission but that the Swedish government does not allow the current law to be applied Jag avvisar Eu-kommissionens svar i form av alla urklipp av påståenden som svenska regeringen lämnat. Jag godtar inte EU-kommissionens beslutsunderlag i form av obevisade påståenden från den part mot vars agerande jag riktat min klagan. I reject the EU Commission response in the form of all the clippings of statements that Swedish government has left. I do not accept the European Commission's decision on the form of unproven claims from the party against whose conduct I directed my complaints. Även EU-kommissionen är förpliktigat att avge sina avgöranden efter en hantering som följer gällande och vedertagna processregler. Mitt klagomål är underbyggd av en omfattande dokumentation. EU-kommissionen tycks inte ha tillgodogjort sig innehållet varken i mina anmälningar eller den bifogade dokumentationen. Jag noterar EU-kommissionens uppenbara brister i svensk språkbehandling. Den bristen tvingar mig att översätta denna min skrivelse till engelska. Also the EU Commission is obliged to submit its findings by a management that complies with existing and established procedural rules. My complaint is substantiated by extensive documentation. The European Commission does not appear to have assimilated the content either in 7

8 my reports or supporting documentation. I note the European Commission obvious flaws in Swedish language processing. The shortage is forcing me to translate this letter to English. När EU-kommissionen motbevisar min dokumentation genom att enbart godta att "de svenska myndigheterna meddelat att den prövning som ska genomföras enligt dessa lagar omfattar andra frågor än dem (sic) som regleras i maskindirektivet." måste kommissionen kräva att den svenska regeringen skall redogöra när och i vilka frågor lagen Maskindirektiv tillämpas vid vindkraftverk. Ingen klagande, i ärenden som rör vindkraftverk, har någonsin erhållit den begärda informationen i vilka fall Maskindirektivet har tillämpats i frågor som rör maskiner vindkraftverk. When the EU Commission refutes my documentation by simply accepting that "the Swedish authorities announced that the review which will comply with these laws include issues other than those (sic) regulated under the Machinery Directive." Commission must require that the Swedish government should explain when and on what issues the Law Machinery Directive ia applicable to the wind turbine. No complaining, in matters relating to wind turbines, has ever received the requested information, in which case the Machinery Directive has been applied in matters relating to wind turbines. EU- kommissionens påstående "Maskindirektivet har genomförs (sic) i Sverige genom arbetsmiljöverkets föreskrifter om maskiner samt allmänna råd om tillämpningen av föreskrifterna (AFS 2008:3), antagna med stöd av arbetsmiljölagen ( ) och arbetsmiljöfärordningen (1977:1166)." är felaktig. EU Commission's assertion :Machinery Directive has implemented in Sweden by the Work Environment Authority regulations on machinery and general advice on the application of the regulations (AFS 2008:3), adopted pursuant to the Environment Act (1977: 1160) and Work Environment Ordinance (1977:1166) is inaccurate. Här följer ny bevisning. Här nedan lämnas ny bevisning på engelska om att Arbetsmiljöverket inte har infört gällande Maskindirektiv genom att ändra det på avgörande punkter. Here is new evidence. Below is submitted new evidence in English about Work Environment Authority has not introduced the current Machinery Directive by changing it at crucial points Below is an overview of how MD has been implemented in Swedish legislation, ASF. MD's fundamental (essential) safety requirements are not fulfilled with regard to technical safety function and solutions, including signs for CE marking and to take into operation and in use wind turbines according to MD 2006/42/EC (AFS 2008:3) and MD 98/37/EC (AFS 1993:10), Annex 1, paragraphs b) ("Principles of safety integration" - "necessary protection measures in relation to risks that cannot be eliminated") and ("Risks due to falling or ejecting objects"); The following is a comparison between MD 2006/42/EC and Swedish AFS 2008:3 intended to implement the Directive 8

9 The ASF 2008:3 is a completely different text that is completely different in the content and structure than the text of current MD 2006/42/EC. The Directive clearly states that the protection and health shall apply to people in general and not only workers who work with machines. Swedish ASF completely omits both the explanatory introduction in "Whereas" and all the articles of the Directive and informs with the text only following MD's Annex 1 The following comparison shows the basic differences in the two texts. Redlining of text that does not exist in the corresponding text. Green Mark, my comments. ASF's paragraphs shall apparently match MD's articles but how the correspondence is inaccurate is shown in the comparison below. MD ASF Article 4 Market surveillance 1. Member States shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that machinery may be placed on the market and/or put into service only if it satisfies the relevant provisions of this Directive and does not endanger the health and safety of persons and, where appropriate, domestic animals or property, when properly installed and maintained and used for its intended purpose or under conditions which can reasonably be foreseen. 2. Member States shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that partly completed machinery can be placed on the market only if it satisfies the relevant provisions of this Directive. Definitions 4 corresponds Article 2 Definitions MD- text Article 4 is not included in ASF Market surveillance is not mentioned in the definitions in ASF. Because Article 4 MD is not included in ASF no Market surveillances are performed. Since Market surveillance is a necessary requirement before a machine can be put into operation, the fact that ASF omits this requirement is a clear breach of MD if machines without Market surveillance despite that are put into operation. 3. Member States shall institute or appoint the competent authorities to monitor the conformity of machinery and partly completed machinery with the provisions set out in paragraphs 1 and Member States shall define the tasks, organisation and powers of the competent authorities referred to in paragraph 3 and shall notify the Commission and other Member States thereof and also of any 9

10 subsequent amendment. Article 14 Notified bodies is not included in ASF 1. Member States shall notify the Commission and the other Member States of the bodies which they have appointed to carry out the assessment of conformity for placing on the market referred to in Article 12(3) and (4), together with the specific conformity assessment procedures and categories of machinery for which these bodies have been appointed and the identification numbers assigned to them beforehand by the Commission. Member States shall notify the Commission and other Member States of any subsequent amendment. following 8 paragraphs are not includes in ASF 14 Innan en delvis fullbordad maskin släpps ut på marknaden ska tillverkaren eller dennes representant se till att a) den relevanta tekniska dokumentation som beskrivs i bilaga 7, avsnitt B är upprättad, b) de monteringsanvisningar som beskrivs i bilaga 6 är upprättade, samt att c) en försäkran för inbyggnad i enlighet med vad som beskrivs i bilaga 2, del 1, avsnitt B har upprättats. This text above is not in MD Article 14 We have asked SWEDAC about Notified bodies but have not received a proper answer. Since no WTG is CE marked in Sweden has no notified bodies have been engaged Anex 1 4. This Annex is organised in several parts. The first one has a general scope and is applicable to all kinds of machinery. The other parts refer to certain kinds of more specific hazards. Nevertheless, it is essential to examine the whole of this Annex in order to be sure of meeting all the relevant essential requirements. When machinery is being designed, the requirements of the general part and the requirements of one or more of the other parts shall be taken into account, depending on the results of the risk assessment carried out in accordance with point 1 of these General Principles. ASF has removed all Articles in the MD and only included MD s Annexes. ASF'S paragraphs should obviously correspond to MD'S Articles but the incorrect correspondence is shown inter alia in the comparison of Article 14 and ASF 14. Bilaga /Träder ikraft I: / Denna bilaga består av flera delar. Den första har en allmän omfattning och gäller samtliga maskintyper. De andra delarna behandlar vissa mer specifika riskkällor. För att med säkerhet uppfylla samtliga tillämpliga grundläggande krav är det dock viktigt att hela denna bilaga tas i beaktande. När maskinerna konstrueras ska kraven i den allmänna 10

11 delen och kraven i en eller flera av de andra delarna beaktas, beroende på resultatet av riskbedömningen i enlighet med punkt 1 i dessa allmänna principer. Grundläggande hälso- och säkerhetskrav för skyddet av miljön ska tillämpas endast på de maskiner som avses i avsnitt 2.4. (AFS 2011:1) ANNEX III CE marking The CE conformity marking shall consist of the initials "CE" taking the following form: TIFF If the CE marking is reduced or enlarged the proportions shown in the above drawing must be respected. The various components of the CE marking must have substantially the same vertical dimension, which may not be less than 5 mm. The minimum dimension may be waived for small-scale machinery. The CE marking must be affixed in the immediate vicinity of the name of the manufacturer or his authorised representative, using the same technique. Where the full quality assurance procedure referred to in Article 12(3)(c) and 12(4)(b) has been applied, the CE marking must be followed by the identification number of the notified body. ASF claims here incorrectly that the protection of the environment is applicable only to the machinery referred to in section /Träder ikraft I: / Maskiner för applicering av bekämpningsmedel Machinery for pesticide application Why this Swedish misleading addition as late as in 2011? Is the reason that so many complaints are made against the expansion of WTGs? Protection must of course be applied to all machines. That's the whole point of the directive. Bilaga 3 CE-märkning Bestämmelser om anbringande och användning av CE-märkning finns i Europaparlamentets och rådets förordning (EG) nr 765/2008 av den 9 juli 2008 om krav för ackreditering och marknadskontroll i samband med saluföring av produkter och upphävande av förordning (EG) nr 339/935 och lagen (2011:791) om ackreditering och teknisk kontroll.. Why this supplement in ASF? Should only the machine WTGs be CE marked in the market? What is repealed as above? Is Accreditation and Conformity Assessment suspended according ASF? 11

13 Article 11 Safeguard clause 1. Where a Member State ascertains that machinery covered by this Directive, bearing the CE marking, accompanied by the EC declaration of conformity and used in accordance with its intended purpose or under conditions which can reasonably be foreseen, is liable to compromise the health and safety of persons and, where appropriate, domestic animals or property, it shall take all appropriate measures to withdraw such machinery from the market, to prohibit the placing on the market and/or putting into service of such machinery or to restrict free movement thereof. 2. The Member State shall immediately inform the Commission and the other Member States of any such measure, indicating the reasons for its decision all of this below is not included in ASF and, in particular, whether the nonconformity is due to: (a) failure to satisfy the essential requirements referred to in Article 5(1)(a); (b) incorrect application of the harmonised standards referred to in Article 7(2); (c) shortcommings in the harmonised standards themselves referred to in Article 7(2). 3. The Commission shall enter into consultation with the parties concerned without delay. The Commission shall consider, after this consultation, whether or not the measures taken by the Member State are justified, and it shall communicate its decision to the Member State which took the initiative, the other Member States, and the manufacturer Suspension or withdrawal of certificated issues or approvals. This is quite different from MD Annex XI Annex 12 Is not included in the ASF Following entire section is not part of the MD. Arbetsmiljöverkets allmänna råd om tillämpningen av föreskrifterna om maskiner Allmänna råd har en annan juridisk status än föreskrifter. De är inte tvingande, deras funktion är att förtydliga innebörden i föreskrifterna. In English: General guidelines have a different legal status than regulations. They are not mandatory, they serve to clarify the meaning of the Regulations. NOTE that ASF claims that the following is not mandatory as above. ASF claims that Safeguard clause in MD Article 11 is not mandatory. Om en medlemsstat konstaterar att en CE-märkt maskin som omfattas av detta direktiv och som åtföljs av en EGförsäkran om överensstämmelse och som används på avsett sätt och under rimligen förutsebara villkor, kan äventyra hälsa och säkerhet för personer samt i förekommande fall husdjur och egendom, vidtar den alla lämpliga åtgärder för att se till att denna maskin dras tillbaka från marknaden, inte släpps ut på marknaden eller tas i drift eller att dess fria rörlighet begränsas. Medlemsstaten ska i sådana fall omedelbart underrätta kommissionen och övriga medlemsstater om varje sådan åtgärd och om skälen för beslutet. 13

14 or his authorised representative. 4. Where the measures referred to in paragraph 1 are based on a shortcoming in the harmonised standards and if the Member State which instigated the measures maintains its position, the Commission or the Member State shall initiate the procedure referred to in Article Where machinery does not conform and bears the CE marking, the competent Member State shall take appropriate action against whomsoever has affixed the marking and shall so inform the Commission. The Commission shall inform the other Member States. 6. The Commission shall ensure that Member States are kept informed of the progress and outcome of the procedure. Conclusion:. The differences between MD and ASF are fundamental as described above so the conclusion is that the Swedish regulations in ASF does not correspond to the whole of MD. On the contrary counteracts ASF binding rules in MD. It is therefore concluded that the government of Sweden did not implement the whole of MD which is failure to fulfill obligations of the treaty between Sweden and the EU. The infringement is extremely serious if it leads to that the dangerous machines wind turbines, whose security does not follow the warnings indicated in MD, represents a serious threat to people and, where appropriate, their domestic animals. As the health and safety of wind turbines machines in Sweden are not subject to the safeguards of the law MD, this threat to mankind is also a violation of applicable law the Aarhus Convention. The Swedish ASF has not properly understood the difference between MD's description of machines Type-control and Market Surveillance. MD Article 4 Market surveillance is mentioned in ASF only in the section on CE marking Appendix 3. See comments in the comparison above. Regardless the provisions of MD and the explanatory text in the "Guide to application of the Machinery Directive 2006/42/EC" with all references to the various existing directives, which cannot limit the provisions of MD, the fact remains of my communication that no evidence of completed Market surveillance are available and the fact that the Swedish government ordered that the MD may not be included in a judicial review of permits for wind turbines is a very serious violation of existing laws and arrangements which cannot be accepted. 14

15 This leads to the fact that the MD does not apply to machines wind turbines in Sweden, which is a flagrant violation of the treaty between Sweden and the EU. Further, these facts, and the entire Swedish permitting process for wind machines, leads to that it is allowed for machines to put people in danger in violation of applicable provisions concerning health and safety in the Convention which can not be accepted. Because according to MD Market surveillance is a necessary step before a machine can be put into operation at its location and Market surveillance has not been implemented in Sweden, all machines wind turbines put into operation in Sweden contravention laws in force in Sweden. The major fundamental differences between MD and ASF as above, leads to the conclusion that the Swedish authorities have not properly implied MD. The fallacy appears clearly on the issue of wind power in Sweden. Also, the fact that the Swedish authorities as late as 2009 found that wind turbines were not machines but instead are buildings, according to the attachment in my communication, is confirming the suspicion that the authorities sought to remove the obstacle for the development of wind turbines as the correct application is the MD.. That MD is overridden in matters of wind turbines is not only a Swedish phenomenon. Not until 2013 the Danish authorities recognized that MD is also valid for wind turbines in Denmark. Therefore even the Danish wind turbines are without correct CE-marking. EU-kommissionen godtar i sitt svar utan vidare det falska påstående; "De svenska myndigheterna har meddelat oss att Arbetsmiljöverket utövar fortlöpande tillsyn och marknadskontroll över vindkraftverken." Eftersom frågan om marknadskontroller är grunden i min anmälan kräver jag att EU-kommisionen av den svenska regeringen begär dokument som visar på utförda marknadskontroller enligt Maskindirektivet Artikel 4. The European Commission accepts in its response 21/01/2014 without a doubt the false assertion, "The Swedish authorities told us Work Environment Authority exercising ongoing supervision and market control over the wind turbines." As the issue of market surveillance is the basis of my application, I require that EU Commission from the Swedish government requesting documents that show performed market market surveillance under the Machinery Directive Article 4. Om sådana dokument inte kan lämnas kräver jag att EU-kommissionen tillstyrker min klagan. If such documents can not be provided, I demand that The European Commission approves my complaints 15

17 This I have proved by documents in which Work Environment Authority announced that the hazard has not been constructed away and that there are no reliable methods to do so. Jag avvisar EU-kommissionens hänvisning till pågående standardiseringsarbete som ovidkommande. I reject the European Commission's reference 01/21/2014 to ongoing standardization work as being irrelevant. Ovidkommande som grund för EU-kommissionens beslut att avvisa min klagan är också hänvisning till att skyddskraven i Maskindirektivet uppfylls av att farligheten anges i någon bruksanvisning. Irrelevant as the basis for the European Commission's decision rejecting my complaints is also reference to that safety requirements of the Machinery Directive are met by that hazard is mentioned in any manual. Jag har rätt att förutsätta att EU-kommissionen känner till att Maskindirektivet entydigt anger att alla kvarvarande farligheter skall vara åtgärdade innan maskiner kan sättas i drift. Jag hänvisar här till de mycket klara och entydiga säkerhetsföreskrifterna som anges i Maskindirektiv Artikel 11. I have a right to expect that The European Commission is aware that the Machinery Directive clearly specifies that all remaining dangers must be corrected before the machinery can be put into operation. I refer here to the very clear and unambiguous warnings indicated in the Machinery Directive Article 11. Jag motsätter mig härmed att EU-kommissionen genom sitt avslag på min klagan medverkar till att gällande lag som dessutom är EU-lag åsidosätts, vilket har till följd att medborgare i Unionen medvetet utsätts för livsfara. I oppose hereby that the EU Commission through its rejection of my complaints contributes to current law which is also EU law is infringed, with the result that citizens of the Union deliberately are endangering their lives. Med stöd av ovanstående motsätter jag mig EU-kommissionens beslut: "Kommissionens avdelningar finner således att inga belägg har lämnats för att maskindirektivet har överträtts. Då ingen rättslig grund föreligger kommer kommissionen att avsluta ärendet," With the support of the above, I oppose the European Commission's decision: "The Commission services therefore finds that no evidence has been provided to the Machinery Directive have been breached. Since no legal basis exists, the Commission will close the case," Jag påpekar än en gång att mina klagomål inte handlar om att " maskindirektivet har överträtts" utan att maskindirektivet på order av den svenska regeringen har åsidosatts i frågor som rör maskiner vindkraftverk. I point out again that my complaint is not about the "Machinery Directive have been violated" but that the machinery directive by order of the Swedish government has been infringed on issues related to wind turbines. Den rättsliga grunden för min anmälan är åsidosättande av gällande lag. The legal basis for my complaint is overriding the applicable law. I det fall EU-kommissionen med anledning av denna skrivelse vidhåller sitt avslag begär jag information om i vilken högre instans jag kan begära min rätt. 17

18 In case that the EU Commission in response to this letter maintains its refusal I request information on the higher court, I can ask for my right. Översättning till engelska följer. EU Commission bases its rejection 21/01/2014 solely on direct copy from the Swedish government's so-called pilot response, the system of the EU Pilot. Of course I have no knowledge of the EU Pilot system but firmly reject that this system of itself makes the government's messages to be consistent with reality Notification of the Swedish state for obstructing the ECJ judgment, Case C-263/08, REFERENCE Directive 85/337/EEC - Public participation in environmental decisionmaking - the right to challenge the decision authorizing projects likely to have a significant environmental impacts. Swedish state takes illegal methods to prevent public participation in environmental decision-making. One example of the many is stated here. 18

The Municipality of Ystad Coastal management in a local perspective TLC The Living Coast - Project seminar 26-28 nov Mona Ohlsson Project manager Climate and Environment The Municipality of Ystad Area:

Name: Year 9 w. 4-7 The leading comic book publisher, Marvel Comics, is starting a new comic, which it hopes will become as popular as its classics Spiderman, Superman and The Incredible Hulk. Your job

Item 6 - Resolution for preferential rights issue. The board of directors in Tobii AB (publ), reg. no. 556613-9654, (the Company ) has on November 5, 2016, resolved to issue shares in the Company, subject

1.1 Invoicing Requirements Document name The document should clearly state INVOICE, DOWNPAYMENT REQUEST or CREDIT NOTE. Invoice lines and credit lines cannot be sent in the same document. Invoicing currency.

Swedish Chapter of International Society of Indoor Air Quality and Climate Aneta Wierzbicka Swedish Chapter of International Society of Indoor Air Quality and Climate Independent and non-profit Swedish

State Examinations Commission Marking schemes published by the State Examinations Commission are not intended to be standalone documents. They are an essential resource for examiners who receive training

Demonstration driver English Svenska Beijer Electronics AB 2000, MA00336A, 2000-12 Beijer Electronics AB reserves the right to change information in this manual without prior notice. All examples in this

1(5) The speed through the entire area is 30 km/h, unless otherwise indicated. Beware of crossing vehicles! Traffic signs, guardrails and exclusions shall be observed and followed. Smoking is prohibited

Workplan Food Spring term 2016 Year 7 Name: During the time we work with this workplan you will also be getting some tests in English. You cannot practice for these tests. Compulsory o Read My Canadian

Swedish disability policy -service and care for people with funcional impairments The cornerstone of Swedish disability policy is the principle that everyone is of equal value and has equal rights. The

Love og regler i Sverige Richard Harlid Narkos- och Intensivvårdsläkare Aleris FysiologLab Stockholm Driving in the USA Driving is the lifeblood of the United States. It fosters commerce, recreation and

Swedish CEF Transport Secretariat Connecting Europe Facility CEF-secretariat Background and structure Precondition The Member State must approve all applications and follow-up reports(asr) The Member State

Support Manual HoistLocatel Electronic Locks 1. S70, Create a Terminating Card for Cards Terminating Card 2. Select the card you want to block, look among Card No. Then click on the single arrow pointing

Swedish framework for qualification www.seqf.se Swedish engineering companies Qualification project leader Proposal - a model to include the qualifications outside of the public education system to the

Writing with context Att skriva med sammanhang What makes a piece of writing easy and interesting to read? Discuss in pairs and write down one word (in English or Swedish) to express your opinion http://korta.nu/sust(answer

Department of Mathematics SF65 Calculus Year 5/6 Module 6: Integrals and applications Sections 6. and 6.5 and Chapter 7 in Calculus by Adams and Essex. Three lectures, two tutorials and one seminar. Important

Custom-made software solutions for increased transport quality and creation of cargo specific lashing protocols. ExcelLoad simulates the maximum forces that may appear during a transport no matter if the

How to format the different elements of a page in the CMS : 1. Typing text When typing text we have 2 possible formats to start a new line: Enter - > is a simple line break. In a paragraph you simply want